Or put another way, is the government there to serve the people, or are people there to serve the government.

Or the related question, do people have natural/God-given (human) rights, or do they instead have rights that are granted - and can be similarly be revoked - by those in power.

I think that - assuming a person is acting lawfully, i.e. not committing harm, theft, or fraud upon another living creature - the correct answer is clearly the first one.

Those who agree with this thought process may be interested in some aspects of Libertarianism, a philosophy (largely ignored by public schools and Universities) established on the ideas of non-coercion and non-violence - except in dealing with those who are acting unlawfully (see definition of lawfully above).

For a ton of excellent - and free - resources (books, blogs, lectures, essays, etc.) on this philosophy and Austrian (free-market) economics, see mises.org.

I always believed a ruling patrty is yet not independent of taking decisions as he has an opposing party to monitor and thats wat called politics, but nowadays Countries like America India have been screwed up,So iots Obvious That the Politicians are Screwing the Whole country.